widerightradio

Here here. Wonderful posts and always worth the read. Thanks and I look forward to future editions.

We don't need anyone at center.

Why not ask for a draft pick? If O'Neil's not worth a 4th or 5th round pick to the Browns, then why should we give him up for free on the basis that there's some moral imperative to allow people to leave for promotions. He did sign a contract with us. If he wanted the right to leave after one year if offered a DC position, he should have negotiated for that in his contract. (Sorry Doc. Saw your post when I hit post. Great minds?)

Given that the list contains Chicago, New York, and Pittsburgh (among others), I think the probability that the Bills will be picked is close to zero. Few big names. No coach on the hot seat. Not a big market. I also like that the thread is tagged "koncks".

Eh. If you like huge tables, massive bars and lots of space then Kelly's is not your thing. But the communal vibe when folks are hanging out the windows and everyone's got a bucket of tall boys at their feet is a beautiful thing.

I prefer Kelly's. http://www.kellysnyc.com/

Didn't the NFL used to call spearing?

No. But if his sole job is to cover the Bills and Bills fans don't read him because he's too negative, that's not a good thing for a young reporter.

Rodak's been poor at predicting Bills games this year: Patriots 35, Bills 24 Panthers 21, Bills 17 Jets 17, Bills 14 Ravens 24, Bills 14 Bills 21, Browns 17 Bengals 24, Bills 9 Dolphins 24, Bills 21 He's 3-4 straight up, not to mention predicting a team that he's covering for the first time to go 1-7. I'm not arguing for naivete, but a bit of optimism for a team that's your sole beat is a good thing. No sense in making enemies out of fans in the first 8 weeks of the season. Maybe it's a good thing he's picking the Saints in this one. He's been wrong 4 times before.

I managed to get tickets to the Vikings/Steelers game, but they do go incredibly quickly. Selling out Wembley (90,000 capacity) is no small feat and it's a stunning place to see a game. Not a bad seat in the house. Crowd tends be about 25% American expats, 75% Brits/other. Overall the fans are pretty knowledgeable about the game. Anytime you play at a neutral site the game will lack a certain intensity that comes from a true home crowd. But that would be true whether you're playing in London or, say, Los Angeles. Games are played at 6 p.m. London time, so they just get slotted as 1 p.m. ET kickoffs. If you want to argue there should be no neutral site games, I get that argument. But if we want to test and expand the game, isn't this the way to do it? I guess I just don't get all the hate. London fans have been terrific. I understand that it's a haul (especially from the West Coast), but if the NFL can sell 90k tickets year after year then I don't see how this isn't a good thing for the game. They don't stop selling beer before the end of the game either.

You're absolutely right that this will (and I assume is) the cornerstone of preserving the NFL from a legal standpoint. Hold harmless clauses will not solve either the failure to disclose or make reasonable efforts to discover information that could have changed that person's mind or those who are not of the age of consent. The NFL has to continue to research injuries on a good faith basis. Even then, we may see the dissolution of football at the youth level.

Right. Joyner's basic theory is that defenses will attack the weakest point in the offensive line, no matter where it is. If you have an A+ LT, but a substandard RT, then the defense will run roughshod over your right side. What you want is a B+/A- line all the way across. This is why we didn't overpay (and shouldn't have) for Levitre. It's also why I think the Bills will bring in a free agent vet for the LG position. Someone unremarkable to ensure consistency across the line.

You say we shouldn't overpay for players, but then suggest that letting Levitre (a B+/A- guard not known for elite run-blocking) walk at $8.5m/year was a mistake. We shouldn't be spending 7% of our cap on a guard, much less a non-elite guard. When a team has been as bad as the Bills have been for as long, it's everything: front office, coaching, significant numbers of under-performing players. I think this ranking reflects a mediocre roster with a horrific QB situation. Whether we're in worse shape than the Rams or the Lions or the Chiefs or the Cardinals, well, that's what the season's for. I think it's highly unlikely that the worst five rosters in the NFL are all from one conference.

The "i" in idiot is silent.

Something on your mind or do you just really like Hartline?